Skip to content

Does placement of a pelvic drain tube after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy make a difference? A surgical trial of 320 men.

A prospective randomised trial comparing lymphocele rate in 320 men after randomisation to pelvic drain versus no pelvic drain during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Status
Withdrawn
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ANZCTR
Registry ID
ACTRN12618000597291
Acronym
POPDART
Enrollment
320
Registered
2018-04-18
Start date
2019-04-01
Completion date
2020-08-31
Last updated
2021-02-16

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

None listed

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of pelvic drain versus no pelvic drain on lymphocele rate in men undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Who is it for? You may be eligible for this study if you are aged 18 years or above and are undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Study details The study will compare the placement of pelvic drain versus no pelvic drain after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Patients will be allocated to one of two treatments based on chance alone. The intervention (drain or no drain) will be implemented at the end of the RARP operation. The urological surgeon will be responsible for the safe placement of drain (or no drain). The drain is made of plastic and is placed in the pelvis adjacent to the surgical bed. Duration of placement typically ranges from 12 to 36 hours. It is hoped that this study will provide high quality evidence to inform management for Australian and international urologists.

Interventions

The study will compare the placement of pelvic drain versus no pelvic drain after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). There is a lack of high level evidence for or against pelvic drain in this setting and hence both of these practices are currently routinely used and are considered standard of care. All patients undergoing RARP for prostate cancer will be offered recruitment into this trial. Written and verbal information will be provided to patients prior to obtaining informed consent

The study will compare the placement of pelvic drain versus no pelvic drain after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). There is a lack of high level evidence for or against pelvic drain in this setting and hence both of these practices are currently routinely used and are considered standard of care. All patients undergoing RARP for prostate cancer will be offered recruitment into this trial. Written and verbal information will be provided to patients prior to obtaining informed consent. The intervention (drain or no drain) will be implemented at the end of the RARP operation. The urological surgeon will be responsible for the safe placement of drain (or no drain). The drain is made of plastic and is placed in the pelvis adjacent to the surgical bed and urethrovesical anastomosis. A bellows (200ml capacity) and bag (700ml capacity) are attached to the drain extra-corporeally to form a closed circuit. Duration of placement typically ranges from 12 to 36 hours.

Sponsors

Nepean Urology Research Group
Lead SponsorOther Collaborative groups

Study design

Allocation
Randomised controlled trial
Primary purpose
Treatment

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
Male
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Any patient undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer

Exclusion criteria

Prior pelvic radiotherapy Prior pelvic surgery Distant metastatic prostate cancer

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ANZCTR · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026